fv1609

I notice that it is presumably a First Aid kit marked with a white cross on a green square, more reminiscent of a First Aid kit in an office or factory, than an AFV. Is this the new thing now? Is it a PC attempt get rid of a Red Cross that might cause offence by being wrongly construed as a red cross of the Crusades rather than the symbol IRC? Incidentally the blurb with that link describes black as a fourth colour. I've not seen black on any in-service pictures. Yes I have seen some privately owned Land Rovers intricately painted incorporating black amidst piddly little rectangles of the other colours. The original concept of the instigator stated there were three colours of large blocks irrespective of the size of the vehicle.

I think the point of the original question was not the arena nor the display area but getting the vehicle between the two. I remember some years the HSE stepped in at the GDSF and prohibited the parade of horticultural implements that hitherto been a featured arena display because the parade had to cross areas that the public had access to despite the convoy being well marshalled.

Neil to my eyes & on my particular screen. Right looks like DBG Left looks like OD

Unhelpfully the seller has omitted to tell us the Mk of this Generator No.10 Judging by the arrangement of the heatsinks, it appears to be a Mk 2 or earlier & was not intended to be used with the transistorised Generator No.9 Mk 4.

Ok Chris thanks for the update, I always enjoy following through these problem posts whether I'm involved or not. A bit like detective story & you are waiting to see what's on the last page, although sometimes there is another chapter unexpectedly & it runs on a bit further. Yes best to stick to the Mk6 switchboard, it is much better constructed than the Mk 1 which has rather poor design of contacts on the starter switch that tend to arc away. Intermittent problems are a pain. On my B60 a year ago I had an oil pressure waning light problem that disappeared, then reappeared yesterday on a final test run before a show. The insulation on the OP wire into the shunt/junction box had abraded some years ago I slid a piece of rubber sleeving down over it & it has been fine. Just like the distribution box no longer being waterproof, there was leakage around the old rubber seal on the junction box cover. Water was ingressing down the metal collar housing the end of the sleeve & setting up corrosion that could then be activated by a tiny amount of moisture. When I've rewired it I'll smear silicone sealant over the much squashed rubber seal, might be worth you doing the same on your seal on the distribution box when the new breakers are in.

Richard we were cross-typing, yes very much that sort of thing.

Yes Wally you are pretty much there. So you have won yet another MO! It was the "Compacting Factor Test" devised by The Road Transport Research Laboratory & this particular illustration comes from Military Engineering Vol XIV - Concrete Part I, Practice, 1952. An explanation of it is best described here: http://www.engineeringcivil.com/workability-of-fresh-concrete-by-compacting-factor-test.html

Yes it is indeed Wally. Well done! Just need to know its purpose now.

Good thought Wally but not a food product & this does eventually become harder than bread.

To recap, this is not for use with liquids. But it is for solid matter that has a gooey consistency of varying density.

Richard I suppose "flavour" was not a very appropriate word to use in that context. What I was meaning to say was that I sympathised with Derek that it had a look of being that sort of thing, although in this instance it wasn't.

I don't know how you get you drinking water in Kent Richard, we don't even do that over here. So sorry to disappoint the latrine watching fraternity on here, but nothing to do with humane waste products. If it helps, this is 1952 & the apparatus evolved from another government body.

It does look like that sort of thing Wally, but isn't though.

Not necessarily radioactive Derek, it does have a certain lavatorial flavour but sorry to disappoint its not that sort of thing this time I'm afraid.

Good thinking but not a liquid going through.

Ah well I thought the gardeners out there might come up with something along those lines, but yes REME robust engineering & in the appropriate colours was something I hadn't considered. Pleasing to the CO no doubt, but this contrivance is not such a thing. Not really

That's excellent news, you must have an unimaginable glow of satisfaction that you could not have expected a week or so ago. I'm sure your appreciation of how charging systems work has come on by leaps & bound, so it really is worth persevering not only increasing your knowledge & experience but maintaining the historic & financial value of the vehicle. No it should be no hotter than any cable through which the current is flowing. It suggests: Dirty contacts on the silver plated pin connectors. The female pins have got expanded. There are some dry / failed joints in the soldered wires into the connector pins. They may show ok on a multimeter continuity test but unable to carry a heavy current. It is very unlikely that there are any defective joints to the generator plug inside the generator itself, more likely to be a cable problem as it can be subject to all sorts of trauma. Look at page 35.

Yes & yes

Err not really

Another Saturday night with no Dad's Army in this region So what is this all about?

No need to remove it. It is better to test it in situ because a stretched connection or broken wire might seem to recover once the cable is flaccid. Place one prod into the female of the connector (ie generator end), then rig up the other prod to a long wire & connect it to the male connector (ie generator panel end) of the wire under test, if necessary with a small crocodile clip. Also check there is no short-circuiting or even resistance leakage from U or V to earth or between U & V.

Yes but have you tested the continuity for each wire in the connecting harness supplying U & V from generator panel to generator? The cable is easily damaged internaly or stretched so that wire to pin connections become unreliable. You could temporarily hook up one of your new cables, & see what happens, but first test the U & V continuity in that.

You need to do a continuity test for each wire supplying U & V from generator panel to generator. See post #2

That's the bargain of the century! That sounds promising, just by energising the field winding & spinning by hand you can see if you get output to some degree. (In fact I have been doing the same to a Generator No.2 - this is a dynamo though with a gearbox & it cannot be spun but by more than half a revolution even that can produce some output) These readings are rather high & should really be 14.5 – 15.5 ohms. Take the average of at least three readings at different rotational points of the spindle. Also slowly rotate the spindle whilst measuring the resistance, if it jumps all over the place then the brushes are worn or there is grot, corrosion, pitting or grooving on the slip rings. High resistance or intermittent contact means a reduced magnetic field so less output, remember on a dynamo the field winding is on the outside but on an alternator the field winding is in the rotating bit (rotor) Not really unless you can get the resistance down by spinning them for a while to try & shift any grot. If you still get high readings, take the generator with the most consistent readings & remove the end cover & inspect the brushes & slip rings clean or replace as necessary. It is quite easy to access the end, see page 23.

Well Charles you've cornered the market on spares! Whatever the package cost you, the generator to generator panel cable is listed as £600, so I imagine you have done alright on the deal. This is important to establish that there is voltage coming through the cable from the generator panel to energise the field winding. The resistance measurement on the generator is equally important to establish there is continuity through the field winding & that the brushes are facilitating this. That's good news, I wonder how they did that without the generator panel & I hope they tested the output from the auxiliary diodes not just the main output diodes. You should be getting that irrespective of whether a generator panel is connected or not. There is no connection from shunt box to generator. It won't effect the ignition warning light. The generator Mk 2 & Mk 3 connections are identical, the outputs are the same except that the auxiliary diodes in the Mk 3 can deliver a higher current than those in a Mk 2. The warning light issue only occurs when using a different generator panel in an installation & shunt box designed for another panel.